Forum
Advisor Blog
Reviews
Strategies
Ideas
Respecting Flags
Posted By: Grunvagr at 9:28 AM, Sunday June 8, 2008 EDT
***This post is subject to change, depending on the community reaction***
Not all flags need to be immediately respected. If you are the leader, consider the flag as a request for mercy, at which point you can choose to respect it or not.
- When is it polite kdice etiquette to respect a flag?
If someone has 8 stacks (especially) and is on the fringe of the board, has more lands than someone else on the board, and gives their flag and promise to not hit you.
(There are other examples: but generally, the player should have SOME tall stack on the board still, and thus a valid reason to at least put in a plea for mercy, instead of three lands with 2 stacks, for example)
- When is it okay to ignore a flag?
If someone has been fighting you all game (draining your lands, dice count and opportunity to win)... and they flag suddenly. ESPECIALLY if they are flagging after either:
1) attacking you with an 8v7 and losing (killing their chance to win).
2) attacking elsewhere, and leaving nothing but 1 and 2 stacks everywhere... (next to your 6+ stacks)
KEY NOTE: I would advise that you should always try to respect a flag so as to not wipe someone off the board COMPLETELY.
(unless you need to go through them to relink, or are rewarding an ally with place)
***Generally, use common sense***
If teal has 2 eigh stacks on the corner of the map and flags... and blue has one 5 stack - conquers two lands and flags next to your 8 stacks. Honestly, think about it. Does he deserve to place over teal? It's a ninja move, in essence, and you can make the call as to respect the flag or not. (I would 8v4, etc and mop up, but again, it is UP to you).
Just realize that not all flags need to be respected 100% immediately. A flag is a REQUEST for mercy, not 100% immunization from all attacks (otherwise it would be coded in the game that way). A flag isn't the equivalent of the immunity idol on "Survivor" if you catch my drift.
___________________________________________
Below is a message from Ryan, while discussing the flagging system, and how we can make it better:
"Honestly, I believe the currently flagging is the most balanced. Let's consider the different types of flagging:
1) No flags. Players battle until one player has every territory. Problem: games get draw out and last 1 hour. Even if 2nd has given up 1st must still keep rolling to win. This is the original reason for flags - to end the game quicker when the outcome has already been determined.
2) If everyone, except 1st, flags then the game ends. This was a good flagging system and lasted quite a while. The problem with it is you could farm dominance very easily and you could ninja flag. For example, 3 players left, 3rd doesn't want to flag, 1st wants more dominance points, 2nd flags. 1st has more incentive to attack 2nd. Ninja flagging meant if you were the last to flag you could make a couple of attacks on your turn, gain position and flag to end the game at a higher position.
3) Instant flagging. We tried having flags to make you instantly leave the game. The problem is that if you're in last and you know another higher player can flag then you'll probably wait. The outcome was that in many games people would wait until you had 3 or 4 players down to 1 or 2 territories - the player in first laughing and gaining dominance. This was frustrating.
4) Position flagging. This flagging fixes the problem with the previous type, lower players know that higher players can't flag out and will flag when they know they are finished. It also fixes ninja flagging - once you flag you can only flag for lower positions. If two players flag for a position they have to fight it out, negotiate, or the server determines the higher player based on territories and dice. It also acts as a contract with higher players and solves the problem of higher players farming. Higher players know that a flagged player can't unflag and isn't a threat.
The problem with #4 thats being mention in my opinion is small compared to the problems that it solves. People respect flags too much. End game negotiations is part of the game and has been with every type of flagging. The real problem is that the current flagging is so easy that we have become lazy with it, use it a lot, and accept most outcomes. The better players will realize this and use flagging to get the best outcomes and this will include not respecting all flags.
With all this said, the problem I think that needs to be solved, and has existed in previous versions of flagging, is to make sure everyone knows that flagging is not a sure thing. If it were it would be enforced in the game. Since flagging for 2nd doesn't always mean you get 2nd it means that its not a hard "rule" and is open to using however you like as a strategic tool. Of course when someone doesn't respect your flag you're going to get upset, but this is part of the game like getting upset when several players decide to focus on attacking you - its part of the game. When people complain about not respecting flags you can point them here - or maybe an advisor can write a blog post about respecting flags.
I think it helps to consider the history of flagging to understand where it's at. If you have suggestions for improvement please volunteer them."
_________________________________________
Grun's Commentary:
Play the game and have fun. Remember that the point is to WIN the game and have fun. Don't flag in round 3 because someone has an 8 stack. Try the chatbox to change the course of events or understand that 8v5s DO defend, and then there you are, poised to win the game and you can get no higher than 2nd due to premature flagging.
PS: Below is a relevant link.
http://kdice.com/discussion/topics/44760615?page=5
Not all flags need to be immediately respected. If you are the leader, consider the flag as a request for mercy, at which point you can choose to respect it or not.
- When is it polite kdice etiquette to respect a flag?
If someone has 8 stacks (especially) and is on the fringe of the board, has more lands than someone else on the board, and gives their flag and promise to not hit you.
(There are other examples: but generally, the player should have SOME tall stack on the board still, and thus a valid reason to at least put in a plea for mercy, instead of three lands with 2 stacks, for example)
- When is it okay to ignore a flag?
If someone has been fighting you all game (draining your lands, dice count and opportunity to win)... and they flag suddenly. ESPECIALLY if they are flagging after either:
1) attacking you with an 8v7 and losing (killing their chance to win).
2) attacking elsewhere, and leaving nothing but 1 and 2 stacks everywhere... (next to your 6+ stacks)
KEY NOTE: I would advise that you should always try to respect a flag so as to not wipe someone off the board COMPLETELY.
(unless you need to go through them to relink, or are rewarding an ally with place)
***Generally, use common sense***
If teal has 2 eigh stacks on the corner of the map and flags... and blue has one 5 stack - conquers two lands and flags next to your 8 stacks. Honestly, think about it. Does he deserve to place over teal? It's a ninja move, in essence, and you can make the call as to respect the flag or not. (I would 8v4, etc and mop up, but again, it is UP to you).
Just realize that not all flags need to be respected 100% immediately. A flag is a REQUEST for mercy, not 100% immunization from all attacks (otherwise it would be coded in the game that way). A flag isn't the equivalent of the immunity idol on "Survivor" if you catch my drift.
___________________________________________
Below is a message from Ryan, while discussing the flagging system, and how we can make it better:
"Honestly, I believe the currently flagging is the most balanced. Let's consider the different types of flagging:
1) No flags. Players battle until one player has every territory. Problem: games get draw out and last 1 hour. Even if 2nd has given up 1st must still keep rolling to win. This is the original reason for flags - to end the game quicker when the outcome has already been determined.
2) If everyone, except 1st, flags then the game ends. This was a good flagging system and lasted quite a while. The problem with it is you could farm dominance very easily and you could ninja flag. For example, 3 players left, 3rd doesn't want to flag, 1st wants more dominance points, 2nd flags. 1st has more incentive to attack 2nd. Ninja flagging meant if you were the last to flag you could make a couple of attacks on your turn, gain position and flag to end the game at a higher position.
3) Instant flagging. We tried having flags to make you instantly leave the game. The problem is that if you're in last and you know another higher player can flag then you'll probably wait. The outcome was that in many games people would wait until you had 3 or 4 players down to 1 or 2 territories - the player in first laughing and gaining dominance. This was frustrating.
4) Position flagging. This flagging fixes the problem with the previous type, lower players know that higher players can't flag out and will flag when they know they are finished. It also fixes ninja flagging - once you flag you can only flag for lower positions. If two players flag for a position they have to fight it out, negotiate, or the server determines the higher player based on territories and dice. It also acts as a contract with higher players and solves the problem of higher players farming. Higher players know that a flagged player can't unflag and isn't a threat.
The problem with #4 thats being mention in my opinion is small compared to the problems that it solves. People respect flags too much. End game negotiations is part of the game and has been with every type of flagging. The real problem is that the current flagging is so easy that we have become lazy with it, use it a lot, and accept most outcomes. The better players will realize this and use flagging to get the best outcomes and this will include not respecting all flags.
With all this said, the problem I think that needs to be solved, and has existed in previous versions of flagging, is to make sure everyone knows that flagging is not a sure thing. If it were it would be enforced in the game. Since flagging for 2nd doesn't always mean you get 2nd it means that its not a hard "rule" and is open to using however you like as a strategic tool. Of course when someone doesn't respect your flag you're going to get upset, but this is part of the game like getting upset when several players decide to focus on attacking you - its part of the game. When people complain about not respecting flags you can point them here - or maybe an advisor can write a blog post about respecting flags.
I think it helps to consider the history of flagging to understand where it's at. If you have suggestions for improvement please volunteer them."
_________________________________________
Grun's Commentary:
Play the game and have fun. Remember that the point is to WIN the game and have fun. Don't flag in round 3 because someone has an 8 stack. Try the chatbox to change the course of events or understand that 8v5s DO defend, and then there you are, poised to win the game and you can get no higher than 2nd due to premature flagging.
PS: Below is a relevant link.
http://kdice.com/discussion/topics/44760615?page=5
|
Johnson213 wrote
at 6:53 PM, Saturday June 7, 2008 EDT I agree that all flags cannot be respected...However, I find it best to honor flags, almost at all costs...I argue that (SPOKEN) truces > flags...so, this can cause problems when honoring one's flag, especially if it will conflict with your "trucee's" position. However, a 'flag' states that "I do not want to challenge any player that has a higher position than this flag." So if someone was challenging a higher position, if they realize that they want lower one...you should honor their flag...unless you've warned them of the position they will receive if they challenge your higher position. Further, I strongly feel that after players have flagged...the individual with the first place, should be the least involve with deciding player's ending position, unless once again you are truced...trucing always takes precedence over flags...if a player is not challenging your position why bother them...even if it prolongs the game...be patient. If you are that busy you shouldn't be playing, right?
|
|
ProxyCheater wrote
at 7:37 PM, Saturday June 7, 2008 EDT I think flagging is one of the key features tied into the social aspects of kdice competition. Someone throws a flag, and everyone has to decide how they're going to respond, and people have different "policies". Some don't respect any flags, which often pisses everyone else off and sometimes lead to an alliance against the leader. Some respect all flags, which sometimes rankles the people below the flagger--they may not think he deserves the place, but if the leader is ready to protect him then there may be little they can do about it. And everything in between.
There are many factors to consider--alliances and truces, ninja flagging (stretching yourself really thin just to reach enough spaces to be able to flag for a higher place), how much of a threat the flagger is to you if you don't respect it, how much you need the flagger's spaces to maintain your ability to win the game, etc. Some people form a decision about what place the person "deserves" and compares that to their flag. There are also lasting effects of your "policy" on flags--a lot of people expect you to respect a reasonable flag, and if you don't, you can create enemies (and vice versa, you can make friends and influence people by respecting their flags) that last beyond the game at hand. I don't think there's any one answer to when to respect flags, and I think that's how it should be--what you do with them can have many positive and negative consequences, and I think it's part of what makes kdice interesting. |
|
FlaggersNeverWin wrote
at 7:45 PM, Saturday June 7, 2008 EDT It should be all about the quality of game play. I personally get most enjoyment in making every attempt to win a particular game. The problem is that others have the goal of getting the most overall points. While this certainly makes sense, unfortunately the flagging system allows them to do so at the expense of actually trying to win the game at hand. And this then allows whoever is in first at the moment (even if poorly positioned and weak) to automatically obtain truce-like friends and easily take out the "better" players (in the sense of the ones who were actually positioning themselves to win). This is so ironic, since the best way to win is actually to be somewhat careless and get people to truce-flag.
Whatever the final solution, I hope it aligns winning the immediate game with winning the points race. Anything else and the game suffers. |
|
|
FlaggersNeverWin wrote
at 7:47 PM, Saturday June 7, 2008 EDT It should be all about the quality of game play. I personally get most enjoyment in making every attempt to win a particular game. The problem is that others have the goal of getting the most overall points. While this certainly makes sense, unfortunately the flagging system allows them to do so at the expense of actually trying to win the game at hand. And this then allows whoever is in first at the moment (even if poorly positioned and weak) to automatically obtain truce-like friends and easily take out the "better" players (in the sense of the ones who were actually positioning themselves to win). This is so ironic, since the best way to win is actually to be somewhat careless and get people to truce-flag.
Whatever the final solution, I hope it aligns winning the immediate game with winning the points race. Anything else and the game suffers. |
|
biteme wrote
at 9:53 PM, Saturday June 7, 2008 EDT flagging = evil
trucing = good it's really as simple as that. if you are a dumb-ass republican, than i'll put in other terms: flagging = taxes trucing = free enterprise it's really as simple as that. LET FREEDOM RING! DOWN WITH THE FLAGGING TYRANNY! |
|
FemmeFatale wrote
at 11:53 PM, Saturday June 7, 2008 EDT I disagree with you reasons to ignore a flag. If someone has been fighting you for first and they lose the battle, I think they do deserve 2nd. Why shouldn't they if they put up a good fight and made the game interesting? It sounds like you're saying that we should only respect a flag from someone who hasn't really fought with you. I thought your goal was for people to fight and not flag right away...but you contradict that.
|
|
know_it_all wrote
at 11:55 PM, Saturday June 7, 2008 EDT are these rules that we have to follow? or are these just some suggestions?
|
|
Bone-Roller wrote
at 12:29 AM, Sunday June 8, 2008 EDT I am generally happy with the current situation, except that I would like the ability to flag for any position at, or below, your current position. Granted this would cause a problem with dom stealing, but the ability to surrender and leave the game, regardless of your actual position, would be a huge bonus. There are many games where, at certain points in the game, you can get a higher score for 4th or 5th than you would end up getting for 2nd. Being able to take your dom and quit would certainly be a nice option.
As to respecting flags, they are not a guaranteed protection. If I am in first and am blocked by a flagged player from attacking or intimidating someone who is currently in 2nd or 3rd, I may need to kill or decapitate the flagged player in order to ensure my 1st. It is unfortunate, but in such a case the flagged player will have to be ruined. Also, a player who takes territories from me and then flags will almost always be killed first and will be given the lowest possible placement. On the other hand, a strong second who concedes to me will almost always be rewarded, even up to allowing that player to eat some of my territories in order to bolster their dom. And yes, it is a given that truces ALWAYS trump flags. Loyalty must be encouraged and rewarded. |
|
Grunvagr wrote
at 12:47 AM, Sunday June 8, 2008 EDT Purely discussion - not rules. And this blog / post is subject to being edited. The more people reply to the topic, the more I can get a feel for how the kcommunity feels about flagging and I'll adjust things accordingly.
|
|
OMG! It's Jesus! wrote
at 5:21 AM, Sunday June 8, 2008 EDT Agreed with Femme. Have some respect for your opponents, show some class.
|
